committed. In recent past‚ the United States Supreme Court has struggled with this issue and with coming to a consensus on how to view proportionality in the Eighth Amendment.2 Recently‚ the United States Supreme Court has decided to hear a Florida case‚ Sullivan v. State‚ 987 So.2d 83 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)‚ where a minor received a life without parole sentence in a conviction for rape.3 This note will analyze the Sullivan case and predict how the Court will likely rule. There are two dimensions that
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Capital punishment
as “the fact-finding process by which the juvenile court determines whether there is sufficient evidence to sustain the allegations in a petition” (Schmalleger 510). These types of trials are designated for juveniles‚ which are similar in nature to adult trials‚ with notable exceptions. Similarities derive from the fact that the due process rights of children and adults are essentially the same. Essentially‚ it is a trial process in which a court determines whether or not the allegations contained
Premium Criminal law
I had the opportunity to visit a district court felony trial and a justice court misdemeanor DUI. These two courts were very different from start to finish from the atmosphere‚ length of the case‚ and how the lawyers acted. Stepping into each of these courtrooms was like stepping into two different worlds. While the proceedings may have been similar‚ the environments were completely opposite. The first court I attended was a district court case that was supposed to be a jury trial. The presiding
Premium Felony Lawyer Prosecutor
Supreme Court decisions had a great positive impact on the rights of suspected criminals throughout the 1900s. Cases such as Mapp v. Ohio‚ Gideon v. Wainwright‚ and Miranda v. Arizona helped clarify the rights of suspected criminals‚ as well as holding the police accountable for their actions so as to reinforce the rights of all people . All three of the aforementioned cases occurred during the Warren Court era‚ from 1953 to 1969 (Boundless). In terms of activism‚ the Warren Court was the most influential
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Supreme Court of the United States Gideon v. Wainwright
Dred Scott Case – The Supreme Court Decision “…they are not included‚ and were not intended to be included‚ under the word “citizens” in the Constitution‚ and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges that instrument provides for and secure to citizens of the United States (Taney).” Historical Context: Dr. John Emerson‚ who was a United States Army Surgeon‚ bought Dred Scott‚ a slave born into slavery. Emerson was a citizen of Missouri‚ although Scott and his master spent much time
Premium American Civil War Slavery in the United States Dred Scott v. Sandford
The Supreme Court has had to rule on issues regarding Presidential immunity in a few cases. Three specifically have helped to set the precedent for how the court would interpret another case brought before the court. In Mississippi v. Johnson the ruling decided whether a president can have an injunction placed on him/her based on the carrying out of their executive duties. Next‚ in the case of Nixon v. Fitzgerald the court ruled on whether a president can be personally sued for decisions they
Premium President of the United States Supreme Court of the United States United States
A Case Report on Supreme Court Decisions The Supreme Court has made decisions that have been important in shaping the interpretation of the Constitution. “The Framers of the Constitution intended for the Supreme Court to stand between the two branches of the national government and the people‚ to prevent abuses of power and improper interpretations of the Constitution (Mott‚ 2008). The case of Brown vs. Board of Education‚ 347 U.S. 483 (1954)‚ is an example of when and amendment to the Constitution
Premium Brown v. Board of Education Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
Federal Jurisdiction Henry‚ a resident of Nevada‚ sued Adam‚ a resident of Utah in the Federal Court in California. He sought $60‚000 damages for personal injuries arising from an automobile accident that occurred in Los Angeles‚ California. Does the Federal Court have jurisdiction? No the federal court does not have jurisdiction over this case. In order for this case to fall within the guidelines of a federal suit it would have to qualify for diversity of citizenship. Diversity of citizenship exists
Premium United States United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
Jaimie Hutchinson Ethical Considerations of Juvenile Transfer to Adult Court In partial fulfillment of the requirements for (CMRJ 500) March 21‚ 2011 Abstract Juveniles in the criminal justice system are a special population. Throughout history juveniles have been looked at as needing to be protected from the harsh realities that face adults daily. The juvenile justice system has primarily operated in a parens patriae capacity and protected the rights of those that were legally incapable
Premium Crime Criminology Criminal justice
people to get accepted. There have been cases where white students sued against their universities because they felt that they were denied admission because of their race. The most known cases are Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger where Caucasian students disputed the University of Michigan’s Race to undergraduate and law school program. These cases were significant in the revision of affirmative action policies. The cases allowed the Supreme Court to question the constitutionality of such
Premium Affirmative action Discrimination